Are Allies doomed from the outset on G40 map?

@Young:

I would hate to go back to intercepters defending @2, during our early 1st Edition games no one would conduct SBRs… they just never happened.

that’s interesting. That hasn’t been my experience at all. In the first edition, did fighters have 2 attacking and defense during air raids? or just defense?

In games of G40 Balance Mod (which increases fighter attack and defense to 2) there’s no shortage of SBRs. What doesn’t occur as often is sending bombers unescorted against targets that contain fighters (principally Moscow, india, london).

Hey Kid,
your idea is weakening too much StBs when no escort is present compared to OOB G40 SBR:
to keep an equilibrium status you must increase StB damage to 1D6+3 or 2D6.
Or gives a better dogfight values to bomber, such as first strike @1 (OOB 1942.2 SBR)
or a better first strike @1 against up to 2 Fgs, which ever the lesser, similar to AAA ways.

In the last case, when an escorting fighter is present, first target means that interceptor always destroy bomber first.
Here an example, and the only case in which your idea is close to G40 OOB odds, when attacker is 2 planes against 1 Fg:

SBR HR: 1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A2 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +9.027 - 5.333 = +3.694 IPCs damage/SBR

(First target: StB A1fs =2AA@1):
D6+2: +7.754 -4.777 =+2.977 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +7.639 - 3.667 = +3.972 IPCs damage/SBR

The basic wrong scenario when Fg gets A2 D2 is -.61 IPCs/SBR - +1.819 = -2.419 IPCs weaker than OOB.
SBR HRules :1 StB A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +4.723 - 5.333 = -0.61 IPC damage/SBR
1D6+3: +5.278 - 5.333 = -0.055 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +5.556 - 5.333 = +0.223 IPC damage/SBR

Regular SBRs (First target: StB A1_first strike_ =2AA@1)
1D6+2: +4.977 - 4.778 = +0.199 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +5.579 - 4.778 = +0.801 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +5.880 - 4.778 = +1.102 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: + 5.486 - 3.667 = +1.819 IPC damage/SBR

So, giving A2 D2 to Fighter is still a major deterrent against SBR in an optimized play.

It needs additional boost to reach something interesting for both attacker and defender to commit into SBR escort and intercept.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35878.msg1411124#msg1411124

OK, everyone. I have some really big statements on a truly better SBR, and not so different from the basics OOB game mechanics.
First a few principles about what can make a good incentive to make SBR or to intercept an SBR attack.

1- A massive number of Strategic Bombers with each an attacking factor @1 is a pretty big deterrent for any TT with fewer Fighter defending @1.
This create an historical aberration in which all air defense stay grounded and let the bombers do the destruction over IC, AB and NB.

2- This situation is created by the fact that intercepting bombers are a worse situation than being bombed up to the maximum damage allowance.
Loosing Fighters which can be useful on regular defense (@4) while achieving almost nothing to destroy incoming bombers is also a major deterrent.

3- For an optimized play, on statistical POV, a good player should ponder whether intercepting the bombers really lowering their odds of loosing IPCs over the other way of letting Bombers directly under IC’s AA gun fire. So, a player must calculate how many IPCs will be lost on average if he intercepts against how many direct bombing damage can be done against him.

4- To prevent the fear of massive attacking bombers (acting like fighters attacking enemy’s fighters) most of you people assumed that a Strategic bomber with an attack factor @0 is part of the whole solution. (I agree, so I make a lot of table to find the perfect balance in regard to the usual odds of G40 OOB SBR.) They should be defenseless in dogfight. But with more destructive power.

5- To see if a given SBR mechanics could work, it should also compare the bare SBR value of Bombers raiding without interference and the TUV lost if a given number of Fighter(s) intercept(s) the bomber. To get an incentive mechanics, the defending player must see a real interest to intercept on a mathematical POV.

@Baron:

Working on the most balanced SBR with Fighter A2 D2, a more complete table is needed to make for additional options:
Comparison of various SBR OOB & HRules StB A1 damage 1D6+2 /1D6+3 / 2D6 / Fg escort A2 Interceptor D2
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35883.msg1409543#msg1409543
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35614.msg1392008#msg1392008

…
SBR HRules : 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor, various damage:
Regular SBRs
1D6+2 (avg 5.5 IPCs): +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3 (avg 6.5 IPCs): +5.417 - 2 = +3.417 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (avg 7 IPCs): +5.833 - 2 = +3.833 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +2.917 - 2 = +0.917 IPC damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +2.917 - 2 = +0.917 IPC damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR

SBR HRules :1 StB A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +4.723 - 5.333 = -0.61 IPC damage/SBR
1D6+3: +5.278 - 5.333 = -0.055 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +5.556 - 5.333 = +0.223 IPC damage/SBR

Regular SBRs (First target: StB A1_first strike_ =2AA@1)
1D6+2: +4.977 - 4.778 = +0.199 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +5.579 - 4.778 = +0.801 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +5.880 - 4.778 = +1.102 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: + 5.486 - 3.667 = +1.819 IPC damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +3.69 - 3.667 = +0.023 IPC damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +3.8 - 4.8 = -1 IPC damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +4.977 - 4.778 = +0.199 IPC damage/StB

SBR HR: 1 StB A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +3.704 - 7.556 = -3.852 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +4.074 - 7.556 = -3.482 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +4.260 - 7.556 = -3.296 IPCs damage/SBR

D6+2 (StB=2AA@1): +5.093- 7.556 = -2.463 IPCs damage/SBR
D6+3 (StB=2AA@1): +5.463 -7.556= -2.093 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (StB=2AA@1): +5.649- 7.556 = -1.907 IPCs damage/SBR

First target: StB A1fs =2AA@1: as AA against up to 2 Fgs
1D6+2: +5.659 - 6.321 = -0.662 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +6.132 -6.321 = -0.189 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +6.369 - 6.321 = +0.048 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +4.85 - 5.056 = -0.206 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +2.025 - 5.056 = -3.031 IPCs damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6:+3.071 - 7.185 = -4.114 IPC. damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +3.874 - 7.185 = -3.311 IPCs damage/SBR

SBR HR: 1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A2 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +9.074 - 8.667 = +0.407 IPC damage/SBR
1D6+3: +9.815 - 8.667 = +1.148 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +10.185 - 8.667 = +1.518 IPCs damage/SBR

D6+2 (StB=2AA@1): +10.648 - 8.667 = +1.981 IPC damage/SBR
D6+3 (StB=2AA@1): +11.389 - 8.667= +2.722 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (StB=2AA@1): +11.759 - 8.667 = +3.092 IPCs damage/SBR

(First target: StB=2AA@1): StB A1 as AAA against up to 2 Fgs
D6+2: +8.611 - 8.667 = -0.056 IPC damage/SBR
1D6+3:+8.981 - 8.667 = +0.314 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +9.167- 8.667 = +0.500 IPCs damage/SBR

(First target: StB A1_first strike_ as AAA vs up to 2 Fgs
D6+2: 8.965 - 7.556 = +1.409 IPC damage/SBR
1D6+3:+9.399 - 7.556 = +1.843 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +9.617- 7.556 = +2.061 IPCs damage/SBR

OOB G40 D6+2: +7.775 - 5.33 = +2.445 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +6.155 - 5.33 = +0.825 IPC damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +6.018 - 7.556 = -1.538 IPCs damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +7.557 - 7.556 = +0.001 IPCs damage/StB

SBR HR: 2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +9.445 - 10.667 = -1.222 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +10.556 - 10.667 = -0.111 IPC damage/SBR
2D6: +11.112 - 10.667 = +0.445 IPC damage/SBR

First target: StB A1 first strike, as AAA up to 2 Fgs
1D6+2: +9.954 - 9.556 = +0.398 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +11.158 - 9.556 = +1.602 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +11.760 - 9.556 = +2.204 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +10.973 - 7.334 = +3.639 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +8.195 - 7.334 = +0.861 IPC damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +7.547 - 9.556 = -2.009 IPCs damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +9.954 - 9.556 = +0.398 IPC damage/StB

SBR HR: 1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A2 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +9.027 - 5.333 = +3.694 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +9.861 - 5.333 = +4.528 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +10.277 - 5.333 = +4.944 IPCs damage/SBR

D6+2 (First target: StB=2AA@1): +7.500 -5.333 = +2.167 IPCs damage/SBR
D6+3 (First target: StB=2AA@1): +6.5= +8.055 -5.333 = +2.722 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (First target: StB=2AA@1): +8.333 -5.333 = +3 IPCs damage/SBR

(First target: StB A1fs =2AA@1):
D6+2: +7.754 -4.777 =+2.977 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3:+8.356 -4.777 = +3.579 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +8.657 -4.777 = +3.880 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +7.639 - 3.667 = +3.972 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +5.973 - 3.667 = +2.306 IPCs damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +5.973 - 5.159 = +0.814 IPCs damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +7.639 -5.159 = +2.480 IPCs damage/SBR

SBR HR: 2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fgs D2
Regular SBRs
1D6+2: +10.639 - 7.334 = +3.304 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +12.028 - 7.334 = +4.694 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +12.722 - 7.334 = +5.388 IPCs damage/SBR

D6+2 (StB=2AA@1): +9.306 - 7.334 = +1.972 IPCs damage/SBR
D6+3 (StB=2AA@1):+10.695 - 7.334 = +3.361 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (StB=2AA@1): +11.389 - 7.334 = +4.055 IPCs damage/SBR

First target: StB A1 first strike, as AAA against up to 2 Fgs
1D6+2: +9.561 - 6.778 = +2.783 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3: +10.996 - 6.778 = +4.218 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6: +11.714 - 6.778 = +4.936 IPCs damage/SBR

G40 OOB D6+2: +11.459 - 5.666 = +5.793 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +8.403 - 5.666 = +2.737 IPCs damage/StB
OOB 1942.2 D6: +8.214 - 6.315 = +1.899 IPCs damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +11.162 - 6.315 = +4.847 IPCs damage/SBR

SBR HRules : 2 StBs doing SBR without interceptor
Regular SBRs
1D6+2 (avg 5.5 IPCs): +9.166 - 4 = +5.166 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+3 (avg 6.5 IPCs): +10.834 - 4 = +6.834 IPCs damage/SBR
2D6 (avg 7 IPCs): +11.666 - 4 = +7.666 IPCs damage/SBR

OOB G40 D6+2: +9.166 - 4 = +5.166 IPCs damage/SBR
Triple A 1942.2 D6: +5.834 - 4 = +1.834 IPCs damage/SBR
OOB 1942.2 D6: +5.834 - 4 = +1.834 IPCs damage/SBR
1942.2 D6+2: +9.166 - 4 = +5.166 IPCs damage/SBR

@theROCmonster:

That’s understandable. If they changed bombers to 2 attack than the way defense rules work on Strategic bombing runs would be fine. Have Strategic bombers be used for bombing more than threat projection. They still can have threat projection because of their range, but they wouldn’t be the god unit they are now.

In that case, I would live with a more strategic target oriented bomber:

Tactical Bomber
Attack 4
Defense 3
Move 4 +1 with AB
Cost 12
TBR dmg: 1D6
Attack 1

Strategic Bomber:
Attack 2
Defense 2
Move 6 +1 with AB
Cost 12
SBR dmg : 2D6
Attack 1

Fighter
Attack 3
Defense 4
Move 4 +1 with AB
Cost 10
SBR:
Attack 2
Defense 2

@Baron:

Hey Kid,
your idea is weakening too much StBs when no escort is present compared to OOB G40 SBR:

Having played the “2 attack/2defend” rule in countless games, I haven’t found that to be the case at all. And none of many of people I’ve played with has ever suggested that they thought the rules weaken SBR too much. But I guess its a matter of opinion!

Can we discuss this matter on your thread?
I don’t want derail too much from the topic.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36715.msg1461349#msg1461349

I’ve noticed a theme; Those who declare war on the US on J1 think axis are dominant.

A local rule could be that they aren’t allowed to. That would allow a lot of US starting forces to escape.

@SubmersedElk:

I typically do a J2 and I still think Axis are dominant. It’s actually because Axis are so dominant that I prefer the less-risky J2, since Axis are better off not taking any extra risk - even small ones - to their dominant position.

Then no DOW on UK and ANZAC, J1? What other moves?

Do your opponents send the US Hawaii and Philippines fleets to Queensland?

@SubmersedElk:

I’ve seen the Phillipines fleet move to Queensland or more directly back to Hawaii, and also seen the DD used as a blocker in the DEI. Hawaii either gets sent to the Atlantic, Queensland, or Western US. There’s another thread here that details my J2 moves and the resulting positions, I call it J2/I2 strategy. Having a mid-sized fleet in Carolines at the end of J1 in that method tends to discourage any US fleet from being in either Queensland or in Hawaii unless he’s going full Pacific (at which point he’s played his hand first, so on G2 you can adjust appropriately).

The US destroyer is only a blocker if Japan declares war against the US. If Japan skips the US in its declaration, the destroyer can be ignored and killed later – it has nowhere to go that it is safe.

Marsh

Hey guys,

I did not follow the entire discussion, however in my opinion it all depends on the bid:

Yes, the standard map favors the Axis, thus bids for the Allies should be installed.

So to me the only question is what bid is necessary to equialize the position. The recent season has shown that even 20-24 bids for the Allies did not stop the Axis from winning in games where they were played properly.

Thus I guess the truth lies currently in the 25-30 range. I could even be in the 30-35 range.

However at a certain point, the bid will be high enough to equalize the game.

Question: If offered Allies +48, is there anybody who would not prefer the Allies then?

@JDOW:

However at a certain point, the bid will be high enough to equalize the game.

That’s true, of course, but the question is “At what cost?” For example, assuming that your proposed bid of 48 is enough for “balance” in a game between two skilled, evenly matched players. You may get “balance,” but you also get a less dynamic early-game experience.

Take, for example, the mediterranean. With a typical bid in the high teens, it is possible for Allies to completely stifle any real chance Italy has to contest the mediterranean–this even before Italy has a chance to move! What should be a dynamic, highly contested theater instead becomes a stagnant pond–removing strategic choices from the Axis player and forcing Italy down predictable path every game. Less fun, in my opinion.

There are other, better ways to balance the game, in my opinion–a topic for a different thread :)

True that there are better ways.

For exactly that reason a new, so called “balanced” version is currently played by a couple of players in the league. This version does not work with extra units but with changed NOs and adjustment in SBR rules for instance.

here is the list of changes:

Revised Air Raid Rules: Fighters attack and defend at 2. Strategic and tactical bombers attack at 1.

Revised Capital Capture Rules: The capture of a capital results in plunder of the enemy’s PUs only the first time that capital is taken. Subsequent recapture of the same capital results in the enemy’s PUs being destroyed.

Additional National Objectives

Russia

*  3 PUs if Russia is at war with European Axis and there are no non-Russian Allied units present in any originally Russian territory.
*  3 PUs for each originally German, Italian, or Pro-Axis neutral territory that Russia controls in mainland Europe (This replaces Russia’s  “Spread of Communism” objective).
*  2 PUs for each of the following Lend-Lease lanes that is “open” (i.e., the specified Sea Zone has no enemy warships and the corresponding territory is Allied controlled) when Russia is at war with European Axis: (1) sz 125, Archangel ; (2) sz 80, Persia; (3) sz 5, Amur (This replaces Russia’s original “Lend Lease” objective).
*  An additional 2 PUs per each open Lend-Lease if Japan has declared war on Russia.

Japan

*  5 PUs if Axis controls Dutch New Guinea, New Guinea, New Britain, and Solomon Islands. (This replaces Japan’s original “Strategic Perimeter” objective).
*  5 PUs if Axis controls Midway, Wake Island, and Guam.

USA

*  5 PUs if USA is at war and Allies control Midway, Wake Island, Guam.
*  5 PUs if USA is at war and Allies control Marshall Islands, Caroline Islands, Paulau Island, Marianas.
*  5 PUs if Allies control at least 2 of: Normandy Bordeaux, Holland Belgium, Southern France, and USA has at least one land unit in any of these territories.
*  5 PUs if Allies control Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia, and USA has at least one land unit in any of these territories.

UK

*  3 PUs for UK Europe if Allies control at least 2 of: Sicily, Sardinia, Greece.
*  3 PUs for UK Europe if Malta, Crete, and Cyprus are Allied or pro-Allied controlled.
*  3 PUs for UK Europe if there are no enemy submarines in the Atlantic, excluding szs 112 and 125-127.
*  3 PUs for UK Pacific when at war with the Japanese if: (1) British control West India and either Egypt or South Africa; and (2) there are no enemy submarines in the western half of the Indian Ocean (sz71,…,sz81).

Italy

*  3 PUs if Malta, Cyprus, and Crete are Axis controlled.

ANZAC

*  3 PUs if ANZAC is at war with Japan, and Allies (not including the Dutch) control Dutch New Guinea, New Guinea, New Britain, and Solomon Islands. (This replaces ANZAC’s “Strategic Islands” Objective).
*  3 PUs if ANZAC is at war with Japan, and Gilbert Islands, Fiji, and Samoa are allied controlled.

New Unit - Marines: Cost 5; Attack at 1 (2 during amphibious assaults; no bonus from artillery); Defend at 2; Can be loaded onto cruisers and battleships (1 to a ship). Ships may only bombard the territory they unload their marines into

VICHY FRANCE RULE SET

The G40 Balance Mod may be played with or without the following rule-set, which is included for historical interest.

Game Conditions for Franco-German Armistice

At the beginning of France’s turn, if the following conditions are met, the Franco-German Armistice will occur:

1. Axis must control both France and Normandy Bordeaux;
2. France must control Southern France; and
3. There must be no non-French, Allied units in Southern France.

Game Consequences of Franco-German Armistice

French Territorial Control: At the beginning of France’s first turn in which Armistice conditions are met, all originally French territories not already under Axis control immediately change ownership to Pro-Axis Neutrals, except: (1) French Equatorial Africa; (2) New Hebrides; (2) any French territories containing non-French allied units.

With the exception of Southern France (see discussion of “Zone Libere” below), Vichy French territory works the same way as other Pro-Axis Neutral territory–i.e., an Axis player may capture Vichy French territory and commandeer its forces by moving a land unit into the territory during the non-combat phase of his turn.

Fly-over restrictions applicable to other Neutral territories do not apply to Vichy French territory.

Fleet at Toulon: In addition to the change in French territorial control, the Armistice changes control of the the French fleet in sz 93, from French to Pro-Axis neutral. The Vichy French fleet maintains a strictly defensive posture. It may not be moved. It may not be captured by the Axis. The fleet is immediately destroyed if any power, other than the Free French, occupies Southern France

“Zone Libre”: Any Axis occupation of Southern France following the Armistice results in a disbandment of the Vichy French forces and a scuttling of the Vichy French fleet in sz 93. The “Zone Libre” army and fleet will revert back to Free-French control if either: (1) France is liberated by the Allies; or (2) Free-French land forces enter Southern France during the combat-movement phase of France’s turn.

Armistice’s Effect on National Objectives: Vichy French territory is considered “Axis” or “Pro-Axis” controlled for purposes of Italy’s “North Africa” and “Roman Empire” Objectives. Any direct takeover of French Indo China by Japan still negates Japan’s “Trade With America” Objective, even if the territory was already Pro-Axis Neutral.

Liberation of France: The Allied liberation of France effectively terminates the Armistice. Any territory and forces still under Vichy French control (including any surviving fleet in sz 93) revert back to Free French control.

me likey :D

@regularkid:

@JDOW:

However at a certain point, the bid will be high enough to equalize the game.

That’s true, of course, but the question is “At what cost?” For example, assuming that your proposed bid of 48 is enough for “balance” in a game between two skilled, evenly matched players. You may get “balance,” but you also get a less dynamic early-game experience.

Take, for example, the mediterranean. With a typical bid in the high teens, it is possible for Allies to completely stifle any real chance Italy has to contest the mediterranean–this even before Italy has a chance to move! What should be a dynamic, highly contested theater instead becomes a stagnant pond–removing strategic choices from the Axis player and forcing Italy down predictable path every game. Less fun, in my opinion.

There are other, better ways to balance the game, in my opinion–a topic for a different thread :)

Well…. Even if UK knocks out the Italian fleet, Cairo can still be taken with the proper help from Germany (if it takes Southern France R1).

If you want to balance the game, give the allies a 20 bid and then also provide the US +5, increasing by +5, every turn.  By turn 10, the US would be pulling down 120.  If the Axis hasn’t won by then, then they will be in real trouble.  This change means the Axis can’t “sit on its butt” so to speak by expanding to economic parity and just wear the allies down.

have actually play tested the automatic ‘increasing USA income’ a few times. it doesn’t work quite the way one would think. Since there’s no way for axis to meaningfully contest the increasing income, it transforms a game that is virtually impossible for allies to win into a game that is virtually impossible for allies to lose (except in cases where axis have achieved their VCs by round 8-ish).

Also is kinda a missed opportunity to use contestable income to make the game more dynamic and fun

All the remedial methods proposed are very aggressive in terms of balance (bid on board, bid in cash, extra NOs (fun!), free income) imply that the game is radically broken and virtually unwinnable, and my experience playing 50+ games of global with no house rules and no modifications does not support this conclusion.

Been following this thread as best as possible so sorry if this was already mentioned and I missed it…

But what happens if Allies spend most of their money on the Atlantic with only a few capital ships in the Pacific to join up with Anzac. The Atlantic money goes to transports and capital ships and then tanks and infantry. With England’s help, you hit Spain and Gibraltar  (for the naval base). Then every single turn the US can land more stuff and set up a nonstop funnel. If Russia does its job then axis should not be able to keep up on both fronts. If Germany sent its Dark Skies bombers to try to stop the funnel, then fine you can wipe each other out and still land more US troops the next turn.

My friends and I have done this to each other and the Spain landing always overwhelms the Axis eventually. …

What have you all experienced when trying this?

@Talleyrand19:

Been following this thread as best as possible so sorry if this was already mentioned and I missed it…

But what happens if Allies spend most of their money on the Atlantic with only a few capital ships in the Pacific to join up with Anzac. The Atlantic money goes to transports and capital ships and then tanks and infantry. With England’s help, you hit Spain and Gibraltar  (for the naval base). Then every single turn the US can land more stuff and set up a nonstop funnel. If Russia does its job then axis should not be able to keep up on both fronts. If Germany sent its Dark Skies bombers to try to stop the funnel, then fine you can wipe each other out and still land more US troops the next turn.

My friends and I have done this to each other and the Spain landing always overwhelms the Axis eventually. …

What have you all experienced when trying this?

Yes, this is a good strategy.  The weak point is then the Germans blitz into the middle east, ignoring Moscow.  They can get an economic advantage and then just sit back and outbuild the allies.